The realities of modern conflict emphasise the urgency of this issue. Contemporary conflicts in the Asia-Pacific are increasingly intra-state and identity-driven, blurring the boundaries between war and peace. New wars—often based on ethnic, racial, or religious divisions—increasingly target civilians using guerrilla and insurrectionary tactics. Civilians now make up as much as 75 per cent of casualties, compared to just 5 per cent at the beginning of the 20th century(Moser& Clark, 2001). Women and children suffer disproportionately, not only as direct victims of violence but also through indirect effects such as livelihood disruption, food insecurity, gender-based violence, malnutrition, and reduced access to education, mental health, and reproductive health services. The WPS agenda, rooted in UN Security Council Resolution 1325, has been decentralised across the Asia-Pacific region. The fourteen countries that have developed WPS NAPs are the Philippines(2010), Nepal(2011), Australia(2012), Indonesia(2014), South Korea(2014), Afghanistan(2015), New Zealand(2015), Japan(2015), Timor-Leste(2016), Solomon Islands(2017), Bangladesh(2019), Sri Lanka(2023), Vietnam(2024), and Malaysia(2025). Martel et al.’s(2021) extensive research highlights varied interpretations of conflict and insecurity across the region. For example, they found that the Philippines recognises insecurities caused by displacement, poverty, trafficking, sexual violence, and“gun culture,” while highlighting the needs of Moro and Indigenous women. Indonesia adopts a broad definition of conflict, encompassing“social conflict” that disrupts stability and development. Bangladesh considers gendered aspects of climate change, disaster relief, violent extremism, and the vulnerabilities of migrant and refugee women. South Korea concentrates on“comfort women” and North Korean refugees, including trafficking and sexual exploitation. Importantly, several NAPs, including those of the Philippines, South Korea, Bangladesh, and Timor-Leste, explicitly identify the role of militaries in perpetuating gendered violence, with South Korea and Bangladesh acknowledging sexual misconduct and structural sexism by military personnel. At the regional level, ASEAN Regional Plan of Action on WPS(UN Women, 2022) marks an important institutional step, complemented by initiatives such as the Korea­Australia partnership on Women, Peace, and Cybersecurity, and the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s(DFAT) WPS Pillar of the Regional Framework(2023­2027)(UN Women, 2023b). These initiatives collectively indicate a growing but uneven institutionalisation of feminist approaches to peace and security. Despite progress, implementation gaps remain stark. India has not adopted a WPS national plan of action, a notable omission given the documented impact of internal conflicts on women and its geopolitical influence. Across the region, women remain underrepresented in decision-making roles and are largely invisible in mainstream representations of foreign and defence policy. Rising authoritarianism, populism, and militarisation have further constricted the policy space for feminist peacebuilding. True security necessitates demilitarisation, mediation, and non-violent conflict resolution mechanisms(Cheung et al., 2021). However, the allocation of substantial military budgets towards weapons and personnel across the region, combined with the diversion of resources away from social investments essential for safeguarding safety and dignity of women in domestic contexts, reveals a continued neglect of feminist considerations. Moreover, events in 2025 offered clear examples of how feminist discourse can be appropriated to advance nationalist or militarized agendas. In various contexts, initiatives that place women at the forefront of state security are often framed as empowerment. However, feminist analysts like Agarwal(2025) and Sarkar(2025) have criticized it for weaponising feminist language to justify state violence and consolidate authority. This is one of the dangers of performative feminism, in which representation and visibility are instrumentalised to reinforce state power rather than to challenge the structural roots of violence and inequality. ​P​ rioritising women’s rights and addressing gendered insecurities should not be treated as peripheral concerns but recognised as central to achieving peace and stability. Embedding feminist principles into security governance through demilitarisation, inclusive diplomacy, and gender­responsive economic justice is vital not only for women’s safety but also for sustaining peace over the long term. 2.3.5 Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid The Asia-Pacific region comprises nine of the fifteen countries most at risk of disaster, according to the World Risk Index 2025(Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft, 2025). Between January and October 2024, more than 140 conflicts, humanitarian incidents, or natural disasters affected the Asia-Pacific region, impacting over 87 million individuals and resulting in nearly 6,000 fatalities. In the past year alone, the region’s disasters have incurred economic damages estimated at USD 85 billion(Humanitarian Action, 2024). The region’s exposure is further heightened by its geography: it sits atop the world’s two most seismically active fault lines, and many of its disasters are inherently transboundary. Yet, humanitarian crises do not impact everyone equally. Pre-existing inequalities in power, access to resources, and privileges exacerbate vulnerabilities in crisis environments. These vulnerabilities lead to a higher risk of losing livelihoods, diminished access to vital services, breakdown of social networks, and greater exposure to multiple forms of gender-based violence(Salud Everywhere, 2025). CH 2: Current State Analysis 27